Uh, what the hell has been your deal recently with the attacks towards me? I'm calling it as they are. Colorado isn't going our way but I think Louisiana will. How is that me just seeing everything as doom and gloom or not being a Republican?

I did not mean it as an attack, but Rawlings is right. Hell, you conceded the John Warner seat the other day.

No, I didn't concede it totally but it is probably gone. It looks like he won't be running again and you know the Dems are going to do everything they can to get Mark Warner to run. If he doesn't go for it, we likely have the upper hand but if Governor Kaine runs, we might have a problem hanging on.

It's not that you're pessimistic about Republican prospects. It's that you're pessimistic about Republican prospects after you're the one who swore to everyone to the very end Santorum would win after all.

If Rawlings had been here and sworn to everyone to the very end Beauprez would win after all, we might have equilibrium, but we don't.

Uh, what the hell has been your deal recently with the attacks towards me? I'm calling it as they are. Colorado isn't going our way but I think Louisiana will. How is that me just seeing everything as doom and gloom or not being a Republican?

I did not mean it as an attack, but Rawlings is right. Hell, you conceded the John Warner seat the other day.

No, I didn't concede it totally but it is probably gone. It looks like he won't be running again and you know the Dems are going to do everything they can to get Mark Warner to run. If he doesn't go for it, we likely have the upper hand but if Governor Kaine runs, we might have a problem hanging on.

Secondly he could also have been talking about Davis's congressional seat. The chances of the GOP retaining that seat without Davis is slim to nil.

No, I was talking about the Senate seat. I don't know much about Davis' House seat.

Davis's seat narrowly went to Bush in 04 (less than 1 point), but is in the heavily Dem trending Northern VA (covers portion of Fairfax and Prince William) He won last year by 11, but outspent his opponent by about 9-1 in order to do so (3.3 mil to 360k)

It's not that you're pessimistic about Republican prospects. It's that you're pessimistic about Republican prospects after you're the one who swore to everyone to the very end Santorum would win after all.

That's really just normal after being so disappointed about something. After John Kerry lost in 2004 following my getting all hopeful about a Democratic victory, I became very pessimistic about Democrats' chances in future elections. It's at least partially something of a defense mechanism - you can't let down if you have low expectations, and you certainly can be pleasantly surprised.

Indeed, and it doesn't make the "We'll lose Virginia" prediction any more accurate than the "We'll win Pennsylvania" prediction. It's trading one extreme for the other extreme, and a very depressing ride in the meantime.

It's not that you're pessimistic about Republican prospects. It's that you're pessimistic about Republican prospects after you're the one who swore to everyone to the very end Santorum would win after all.

No, it's really unrelated. I was pessimistic about Colorado ever since Udall got in the race all the way back in 2004-2005.

Indeed, and it doesn't make the "We'll lose Virginia" prediction any more accurate than the "We'll win Pennsylvania" prediction. It's trading one extreme for the other extreme, and a very depressing ride in the meantime.

The difference being that Santorum had a record of defying the electoral odds. Give me a candidate in Virginia and Colorado that can do the same. Sorry but Schaffer isn't that strong and I don't see anyone like that emerging in Virginia. I would have told you the same thing years ago.

Indeed, and it doesn't make the "We'll lose Virginia" prediction any more accurate than the "We'll win Pennsylvania" prediction. It's trading one extreme for the other extreme, and a very depressing ride in the meantime.

I am far from the last one to defend Phil, I argued with him as much as anyone regarding PA last year. However, he doesn't seem to be going from one extreme to another, he believes the GOP will win LA for one example.

He seems to have explained himself quite well on why he thnks the VA Senate Seat will go Democratic. He has stated he thinks the Dems will get Warner to run. Believing Mark Warner if he does run would win is not being extreme, its actually being realistic, not thinking Mark Warner would win or even thinking it would be a tossup if he ran is what extreme would be.

CO: This may be a long-shot for Schaffer, but I doubt Udall wins it by more than 5 points

VA: I wouldn't be so quick to declare a Democratic vicory when neither John Warner announced retirement nor Mark Warner jumped into the race. John Warner will probably retire, but this isn't a lost hope yet.

Even now, I'm beginning to think that 2008 will not be a GOP-friendly year in the Senate.

Are you being sarcastic? I really think there is about an 80% chance of Udall winning against Schaffer.

Are you really a Republican? Or is this schadenfreude for you, pure and simple? Because your own state is irrevocably blue do you gloat in the demise of red states?

Do me a favor...ask anyone on this forum if Keystone Phil is really a Republican. Ask anyone. No one can call me a RINO so do me a favor and get to know this forum a little better before you say stupid stuff.

By the way, kid, my state isn't solid Dem so get a clue on that as well.

Quote

Good grief, Charlie Brown! How can you be so pessimistic? I'm a Colorado Republican and I'm telling you to buckle your seat belt for a major campaign in which the Republican emerges. Aizen is a Colorado Democrat telling you to buckle your seatbelt for a major campaign. So, maybe--just thinking out loud here--you should actually believe us. You clearly have no idea what's going on in Colorado--at best--and, at worst, you are a self-hating Republican. If you truly believe that we're right on the issues then you having nothing to worry about in '08. It won't be a great year--but this 80% garbage is silly. Just silly.

Schaffer is a weak candidate and Udall is a powerhouse. I'm not a "self hating Republican" because I can recognize the obvious.

Ultimately, I hope I am wrong. I hope I have to look like a complete ass when it comes to this prediction when all is said and done in 2008 because I want to keep the seat. Don't think that I am rooting for the Dems to pick up Colorado.

"Powerhouse?" Udall, a powerhouse??? Why do you say that? He's a lifetime congressman from the state's most liberal district? That's like rolling out the representative from inner-city Philly or something and putting him up against the rep. from Scranton. The Philly guy has to convince the whole state that he's not an uber-liberal lifetime politician. But the Scranton guy is folksy, relatable, likeable, well-known, conservative, and is not a lifetime politician. Even in blue Pennsylvania I would give the edge to the Scranton guy. In Colorado--more conservative than PA--why wouldn't you give Schaffer the edge?

That's a pretty awful example since Scranton is a solid Dem area. Any Republican elected there would have to be a brilliant politician. Schaffer would be equivalent to someone from those wacky counties in the center of the state.

It looks like Schaffer VS. Udal could be the sleeper big money contest of 2008, and despite the critics, Schaffer has a pretty good shot.

Logged

“We can never be too tardy to begin the work of blood.”“But it is a bad mode of settling disputes to make soldiers your ambassadors, and to point to the halter and the gallows as your ultimatum.”-John Tyler, 10th President of the United States

That's a pretty awful example since Scranton is a solid Dem area. Any Republican elected there would have to be a brilliant politician. Schaffer would be equivalent to someone from those wacky counties in the center of the state.

Actually, PA 10 is not far from Scranton and could be considered the Scranton area. PA 10, as you know, is GOP country.